Mary Poppins Returns

Oh dear.

To be directed by Rob Marshall (Into The Woods), script by the guy who did Life Of Pi and featuring an entirely new set of songs, it'll be adapted from the books but is not supposed to be a sequel to the original at all.

People are generally not terribly psyched about the idea. Though I suppose the team behind it could really be a lot worse.

edited 14th Sep '15 4:52:26 PM by LE0Night

Well, I liked Into the Woods, and Chicago won Oscars, so... I guess I'll keep an open mind?

What...did Travers die? How did Disney even got the rights to do this?

Why?

You're fighting an uphill battle. Disney is not picking easy fights...

Many petitions were signed to stop this from happening, but nothing worked.

There are a few classics which are practically untouchable. Marry Poppins is one of them. Sure, you could do a "Mary Poppins went to another family" story, but Julie Andrews is practically irreplaceable. There are really few actresses which have the singing talent, the beauty and the charm necessary. The only one which has a good voice and is a convincing actress on top of it is Anne Hathaway, and she is an entirely different type, she would never be able to sell the non-nonsense attitude of the character.

Emily Blunt's supposed to be Mary Poppins Two Point Oh.

No, no, there is a really easy way to do a Mary Poppins sequel:

Yeah, I know the cast Emily Blunt and I know she can somewhat sing, but she is supposed to step into the shoes of stage legend Julie Andrews. If they really have to do it, I wish that they would go to broadway in search of a stage actor who has enough talent to transition to movies instead of looking into movie stars who can hold a tune.

Technically wouldn't this be a remake not a reboot?

Depends on if they are remaking the original film or just re-adapting the book.

How could you tell the difference?

By figuring out if they lift stuff from the movie or not. Which is not that difficult, considering that the movie is very loosely based on the book.

Blunt hasn't been cast yet; it's just rumors. I am 100% against this, but there's nothing I can do about it. It is what it is. If you're gonna have someone replace Andrews, it's Hathaway, not Blunt.

No i mean reboot is for a franchise. For a single film it's a remake. If they just make a new adaptation of the book, it's a readaptation like with Cinderella.

Sequel, interquel, prequel, remake, reboot, it doesn't matter. The original wasn't perfect but it was a damn good movie. Just because there's room for another doesn't mean it should happen, especially with a hack like Rob Marshall (Chicago is overrated, Pirates 4 was horrible, Into the Woods was a disgrace to Sondheim).

I feel like Blunt COULD do a good job since she's a great actress and she's been in a dozen vastly different roles. Compare Rita 'Full Metal Bitch' Vrataski in Edge of Tomorrow to the Baker's Wife in Into the Woods which came out with in, what? A year or so of each other?

I have no doubts that Blunt would give a valiant performance and bring something new to the character, even if it might be something very small like a waver in her face at a key scene that never gets mentioned again.

But I just don't think were in a time where Mary Poppins being remade would add anything new. You could do a setting update, theoretically, but I feel that'd get too much into 'Social Media, Video Games, and New Media are the devil' and otherwise be really cheap ways to justify a remake.

Here we go, the production has officially started and here's the main cast: Emily Blunt as Mary Poppins, Ben Whishaw and Emily Mortimer as Michael and Jane, the "two Banks children all grown up", Lin-Manuel Miranda as a "street lamplighter named Jack", Julie Walters (i.e. Mrs. Weasley) as "Michael’s housekeeper Ellen", Colin Firth as "William Weatherall Wilkins", the man who runs Fidelity Fiduciary Bank where Mr. Dawes Jr. (Dick Van Dyke) is chairman, and Meryl Streep, who will be playing Mary Poppins’ eccentric cousin Topsy.

And the official blurb goes as thus:

edited 11th Feb '17 6:29:00 AM by LE0Night

I'm going to see this.

Why?

Lin-manuel Miranda's in it, stoopid.

If I can't get to see "Hamilton" in the theatre because I don't have a first born son I can sell for tickets for its West End run, I'mma doing the next best or least worst other thing.

Kinda disappointed we didn't get a Mary Poppins vs. Peter Pan movie. They're the perfect match.

Never watched the first Mary Poppins.

I can't wait to see what sort of topics will come up in this version.

I wonder if any of these new characters are from the books. Also, getting Dick Van Dyke to play the son of the chairman is a charming in-joke even though the character would have to be completely different from the original movie (he was the board member with the beard and high pitched voice).

edited 16th Feb '17 3:05:00 PM by DS9guy

Oh yeah, he was that super old dude who was Mr. Banks' boss.

When I was a kid, I was really surprised about how Dick Van Dyke played that guy through the magic of make-up!

I guess that make-up won't be necessary now that Dick is genuinely old, eh?

Now they'll use CGI to make him look like a young man instead.